I like that you can order any of various editions of the Communist Manifesto new or used on Amazon and, if you have amazon prime, have them delivered within a day. Then you can sit there and think about how STUPID capitalism is

My dog, Chocolate, has no taste in cereal. She loves Cheerios, the most bland cereal ever to adorn a commercial on a Saturday morning, but will not touch peanut butter Cap'n Crunch, one of the 100 most delicious things ever devised by humankind. Even if I try to trick her and toss her a piece of Cap'n Crunch in among some Cheerios, she'll spit it out and stare me down waiting for another Cheerio. Insanity.

I like that you can order any of various editions of the Communist Manifesto new or used on Amazon and, if you have amazon prime, have them delivered within a day. Then you can sit there and think about how STUPID capitalism is

ah, THE COMMUNIST MANIFEST. The best cure for insomnia ever devised by the mind of man!

I've always half suspected that the Soviet Union actually died of ideological boredom!

I remember hearing something about that once. As I understand it, when Jack Pierce designed the costume for the 1931 movie, he thought about how Frankenstein would install the brain. Pierce concluded that he'd go about it as directly as possible, and designed something that looked like the doctor just sawed the top and back of the head off, popped in the brain and kind of crudely fastened everything back together. It fits with the costume's overall emphasis of function over form. Frankenstein is more concerned with making everything work than making it look nice.

Looking back at the original makeup, the head is kind of square, but not as much as later incarnations based on it. It's been exaggerated over the years.

My dog, Chocolate, has no taste in cereal. She loves Cheerios, the most bland cereal ever to adorn a commercial on a Saturday morning, but will not touch peanut butter Cap'n Crunch, one of the 100 most delicious things ever devised by humankind. Even if I try to trick her and toss her a piece of Cap'n Crunch in among some Cheerios, she'll spit it out and stare me down waiting for another Cheerio. Insanity.

LOL...I guess your dog and I have the same insanity. Cheerios is my favorite cereal.

Thanks for the explanation Andy! I think it may have gotten flatter in later sequels due to all the large wooden beams that were always falling on him as he was escaping burning buildings

Found Pierce's exact explanation:

Quote

"I did three months of research in anatomy, surgery, criminology, ancient and modern burial customs, and electrodynamics. My anatomical studies taught me that there are six ways a surgeon can cut the skull in order to take out or put in a brain. I figured that Frankenstein, who was a scientist but no practising surgeon, would take the simplest surgical way. He would cut the top of the skull off straight across like a pot lid, hinge it, pop the brain in, and then clamp it on tight. That's the reason I decided to make the Monster's head square and flat like a shoe box and dig that big scar across his forehead with the metal clamps holding it together."

I was that rarest of biology majors, one who was neither a creationist nor one who subscribed to evolution as a blank check explain-all. Given that, I've recently been toying with the idea that I think physical pain is completely incongruous with the theory of evolution. I don't see how an organism could evolve such a condition as pain; how it could create it. I understand pain's utility, just not a biological directive that would set its creation in motion devoid of guiding oversight, which is itself invalidated by the random/reactant nature of evolution as a theory. For pain to have been a mutation passed on genetically and amplifying over countless generations as a detriment to an individual but a boon to species continuation seems exceedingly implausible given the parameters of evolutionary hypothesis. I see this contradiction not as something to drive me toward creationism, but rather something that deepens the mystery of life's origins, which I don't think have been satisfactorily explained even in a remedial sense. Despite our hubris, science is in its infancy.

For pain to have been a mutation passed on genetically and amplifying over countless generations as a detriment to an individual but a boon to species continuation seems exceedingly implausible given the parameters of evolutionary hypothesis.

Pain is pretty basic. Perhaps back when it had more survival value the inability to feel pain has been selected against, rather than the ability to feel pain being selected 'for'?